|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

WordPress 2.0 is better than ever (NewsForge)

Joe 'Zonker' Brockmeier reviews WordPress 2.0 on NewsForge. "WordPress 2.0 is out, and it brings a slew of improvements and new features, including WYSIWYG editing, user roles, easy database backups, and more. The WordPress home page describes the software as "state-of-the-art semantic personal publishing platform," but when you boil it down, WordPress is just damn good blogging software. WordPress is written in PHP, requires a MySQL database, and is available under the GPL. It's easy to use and fairly powerful."

to post comments

WordPress 2.0 is better than ever (NewsForge)

Posted Jan 6, 2006 20:10 UTC (Fri) by roskegg (subscriber, #105) [Link] (6 responses)

Sigh. So many good pieces of software are hobbled by MySQL dependance. I refuse to use software that doesn't support either Postgres or SQLite.

My earliest experience of MySQL is seven years ago, when I bought a book on SQL. I brought it home, all excited to be learning how to use big databases. I typed in the very first, simple example in the book. An outer join or something. It didn't work! Hopped on IRC, and found out "that isn't supported. MySQL is for SPEED!"

Installed Postgres. Typed in some really complex examples from later in the book. They all worked without a flaw!

I thought, "screw speed, I'm going to use something that actually works; I know they'll speed it up in the future, and when MySQL gets around to supporting this stuff, it'll definitely slow down itself."

And so far I've been right!

WordPress 2.0 is better than ever (NewsForge)

Posted Jan 6, 2006 21:57 UTC (Fri) by mikec (guest, #30884) [Link] (1 responses)

I am perhaps not the right person to make this observation, as I try to avoid software that requries me to even know that it requires an *SQL database of any form, but...

How about using the "right tool"?

There are those applications which require a rich database capability and those that do not...

WYSISWYG blog publishing tools don't seem to fit that bill... So, the only metrics of interest in this case would likely be speed and stability.

Again, from my perspective, I should not even know that there is a database running. So, requiring them to use one or the other smells a bit like trap that Microsoft likes to lay out...

That is, you must have the right list of buzzwords and mis-leading statements about compaitibility and compliance or you are not worthy of consideration. Then in the end, they generally provide the least stable, capable and cost effective solution relative to either what _could_ be accomplished or even what _is_ available.

WordPress 2.0 is better than ever (NewsForge)

Posted Jan 7, 2006 4:38 UTC (Sat) by zblaxell (subscriber, #26385) [Link]

Blog software is full of little details about user identity, thread relationships, date stamps and the text of hundreds of thousands of articles. Compare

# Not really SQL
my $rv = $dbh->do(q{
-- posted_time and article_id have DEFAULT values filled in automatically.
INSERT INTO posts (poster_id, article_text, parent_article_id) values (?, ?, ?)
}, {}, $poster_id, $article_text, $parent_article_id);

with

# Not really Perl
# You need to implement your own sequences, or generate UID's
while (1) {
open(ID, "<article-seq") or die;
last if flock(ID, LOCK_EX|LOCK_NB);
flock(ID, LOCK_EX);
}
my $id = <ID> or die; ++$id;
my $id_fh = IO::AtomicFile->open("article-seq.new", "w");
print $id_fh $id or die;
$id_fh->close() or die;
close(ID) or die;
# Create new article in a text file.
# Don't forget to clean up all the leftover ..TMP files if your
# system or process crashes, or the disk fills up while posting.
my $art_fh = IO::AtomicFile->open("articles/$id.txt", "w");
# And of course you'll have to parse this stuff too
print $art_fh "Article: $id\n" or die;
print $art_fh "Posted: " . time(). "\n" or die;
print $art_fh "Poster: $poster_id\n" or die;
print $art_fh "Parent: $parent_id\n" or die;
print $art_fh "\n$article_text" or die;
$art_fh->close() or die;
# And update all those indexes
link("articles/$id.txt", "posters/$poster_id/$id.txt");
link("articles/$parent_id.txt", "parent_articles/$id.txt");

Now suppose you wanted to send email whenever someone replies to someone else's posting. In SQL, you could add a trigger or rule, a message queue table, and a daemon which sends the email messages, so the example above doesn't change. In the filesystem implementation you'd be adding some more links, state tracking, and cleanup to the above, in addition to the extra code you'd have to add to do the actual work of sending emails.

WordPress 2.0 is better than ever (NewsForge)

Posted Jan 6, 2006 22:20 UTC (Fri) by marduk (subscriber, #3831) [Link] (1 responses)

This is like the "Torvalds vs. Tanenbaum" argument where one professes the "inferiority" of a technology without much regard to how productive many have found said technology to be.

In other words, MySQL may be technically inferior to other databases but for many people it works for them and it works well. The same could be said about other technologies (e.g. Abiword vs. OOo Writer): If it works for you, fine. If not, try something else. My guess is MySQL works for WordPress else they wouldn't be using it.

WordPress 2.0 is better than ever (NewsForge)

Posted Jan 12, 2006 8:20 UTC (Thu) by ctg (guest, #3459) [Link]

Hardly. Torvalds v. Tannenbaum is about a clash between two different engineering/design approaches.

A better analogy is Windows Versus Linux. Linux is created with an emphasis on engineering - good design, based on experience and review of previous designs - to get it right.

Windows is based on great marketing, capturing mindshare etc. and being just about good enough. It was home grown, and failed to make sure of a legacy of previous software developments - the "good enough to ship" method just stores up problems further down the line when the inadequacies of the design and engineering come to light.

It's solid marketing with a "that'll do" product, versus solid engineering, leveraging the collected wisdom and experience of the community.

All credit to MySQL for grabbing mindshare - but I prefer the engineering approach of the proper relational databases - building on the experience and good practice developed over the past.

Of course, if MySQL is "good enough" and you are only interested in the short term advantage, then use it by all means.

MySQL vs PostgreSQL

Posted Jan 7, 2006 7:40 UTC (Sat) by aturner (guest, #4037) [Link]

Well I just installed Wordpress (1.5.2 a few weeks ago and upgraded to 2.0 this week). I'm also a
big PostgreSQL fan and while having cut my teeth on MySQL, I'll never willingly use it again because
PG is so superior.

So while I'm annoyed to have to run MySQL and PHP (which I personally think is the worst
programming language ever) on my server, but WordPress really is very nice and I'm quite happy
with it- they really did a nice job... it really is worth letting go of your rightly deserved distaste for
MySQL if you're looking for a good blogging setup.

MySQL-to-PostgreSQL migration possibility

Posted Jan 7, 2006 20:57 UTC (Sat) by dskoll (subscriber, #1630) [Link]

There is a project in the PostgreSQL community to add a MySQL compatibility layer on top of PG: http://pgfoundry.org/projects/mysqlcompat/

I'm not sure how seamless it will be, but if it's reasonable, it will allow PostgreSQL users to run so-called MySQL apps without having to run two different database servers on their machine. I don't particularly like MySQL, and we use PostgreSQL quite heavily, so it's irritating to have to run them both just because some silly apps demand MySQL.


Copyright © 2006, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds